Measuring Client Satisfaction and Engagement: The Role of a Mentor Parent Program in Family Drug Treatment Court

<p>The New Zealand Alcohol and other Drug Treatment Court (AODTC) is an innovative approach to addressing offending by people with an alcohol or other drug addiction. Based on the United States Drug Treatment Court model, the AODTC aims to reduce reoffending, reduce addiction and support offenders’ health and wellbeing. Most studies of DTCs are quantitative and focus on recidivism rates and cost-effectiveness. There have been relatively few in-depth studies of how DTCs operate and even fewer that focus on the offender’s experience. This thesis is a critical study of the Auckland and Waitakere AODTCs and is the first study of its kind in New Zealand. Conducted over seven months, the fieldwork involved 536 hours of observations, interviews with offenders and informal conversations with court workers, treatment providers and offenders’ families. The research also included extensive analysis of documents produced by and about the AODTC pilot and the US counterparts. The research found that the AODTC operates in a largely unregulated problem-solving court zone. The wide discretion of judges and collaboration with community treatment providers, lauded by proponents of the AODTC as key to its therapeutic effectiveness, were found to create a number of significant harms for participants. In addition, the focus on addiction as a disease and abstinence as a goal and measure of progress invites judicial subjectivity and places considerable burdens on participants. The research also found that the AODTC metes out punishment under the guise of treatment, preventing participants from accessing treatment and breach the principle of proportionality in their responses to offending and non-compliance. The competing goals of treatment and punishment also prevent participants from receiving adequate support in the AODTC programme. In particular, Māori, women, transgender, offenders with a coexisting disorder and brain injury are less likely to have access to the right treatment and proper support. These findings challenge the assumptions that the AODTC therapeutic mandate treats AOD related offending and supports offenders’ health and wellbeing. In order to protect AODTC offenders, a series of recommendations for change are made to constrain judicial involvement in treatment, to provide better options for community-based treatment and to ensure appropriate addiction treatment services. Overall, the thesis provides valuable empirical insight into how the AODTC and the criminal justice system constitute AOD offending, addiction treatment policies, and manage the addicted offender to accomplish recovery. It also adds important data to the international pool of DTC ethnographies and problem-solving court literature, providing a point of focus from which to consider broader policy and evaluative criteria of people’s experiences of treatment in the problem-solving court. It is hoped that this research is able to contribute to law reform involving specialist problem solving courts in New Zealand.</p>

Download Full-text

Governing addiction: The Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Court in New Zealand

10.26686/wgtn.17144039.v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

◽

Toni Carr

Keyword(s):

New Zealand ◽

Problem Solving ◽

Drug Treatment ◽

Addiction Treatment ◽

The United States ◽

Critical Study ◽

Treatment Providers ◽

Health And Wellbeing ◽

Drug Treatment Court ◽

Treatment Court

<p>The New Zealand Alcohol and other Drug Treatment Court (AODTC) is an innovative approach to addressing offending by people with an alcohol or other drug addiction. Based on the United States Drug Treatment Court model, the AODTC aims to reduce reoffending, reduce addiction and support offenders’ health and wellbeing. Most studies of DTCs are quantitative and focus on recidivism rates and cost-effectiveness. There have been relatively few in-depth studies of how DTCs operate and even fewer that focus on the offender’s experience. This thesis is a critical study of the Auckland and Waitakere AODTCs and is the first study of its kind in New Zealand. Conducted over seven months, the fieldwork involved 536 hours of observations, interviews with offenders and informal conversations with court workers, treatment providers and offenders’ families. The research also included extensive analysis of documents produced by and about the AODTC pilot and the US counterparts. The research found that the AODTC operates in a largely unregulated problem-solving court zone. The wide discretion of judges and collaboration with community treatment providers, lauded by proponents of the AODTC as key to its therapeutic effectiveness, were found to create a number of significant harms for participants. In addition, the focus on addiction as a disease and abstinence as a goal and measure of progress invites judicial subjectivity and places considerable burdens on participants. The research also found that the AODTC metes out punishment under the guise of treatment, preventing participants from accessing treatment and breach the principle of proportionality in their responses to offending and non-compliance. The competing goals of treatment and punishment also prevent participants from receiving adequate support in the AODTC programme. In particular, Māori, women, transgender, offenders with a coexisting disorder and brain injury are less likely to have access to the right treatment and proper support. These findings challenge the assumptions that the AODTC therapeutic mandate treats AOD related offending and supports offenders’ health and wellbeing. In order to protect AODTC offenders, a series of recommendations for change are made to constrain judicial involvement in treatment, to provide better options for community-based treatment and to ensure appropriate addiction treatment services. Overall, the thesis provides valuable empirical insight into how the AODTC and the criminal justice system constitute AOD offending, addiction treatment policies, and manage the addicted offender to accomplish recovery. It also adds important data to the international pool of DTC ethnographies and problem-solving court literature, providing a point of focus from which to consider broader policy and evaluative criteria of people’s experiences of treatment in the problem-solving court. It is hoped that this research is able to contribute to law reform involving specialist problem solving courts in New Zealand.</p>

Download Full-text

The drug treatment court movement

Criminal Justice Matters ◽

10.1080/09627250802699772 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 75 (1) ◽

pp. 30-31

Author(s):

Dawn Moore

Keyword(s):

Drug Treatment ◽

Drug Treatment Court ◽

Treatment Court

Download Full-text

Translation of National Juvenile Drug Treatment Court Guidelines into Statewide Standards and Practices: a Case Study

American Journal of Criminal Justice ◽

10.1007/s12103-020-09563-z ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Stephen W. Phillippi ◽

Casey L. Thomas ◽

Kerry Lentini

Keyword(s):

Drug Treatment ◽

Drug Treatment Court ◽

Treatment Court

Download Full-text

A Qualitative Analysis of Family Dynamics and Motivation in Sessions With 15 Women in Drug Treatment Court

Substance Abuse Research and Treatment ◽

10.1177/1178221818818846 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 13 ◽

pp. 117822181881884

Author(s):

Zoe E Goldberg ◽

Nancy P Chin ◽

Amina Alio ◽

Geoffrey Williams ◽

Diane S Morse

Keyword(s):

Drug Treatment ◽

Family Relationships ◽

Well Being ◽

Psychological Needs ◽

Family Systems Theory ◽

Health Goals ◽

Drug Treatment Court ◽

Physical Health Problems ◽

Framework Approach ◽

Treatment Court

Women with substance use disorders (SUDs) often experience inadequate health care, mental and physical health problems, trauma, lack of social support, and undermining of support for psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness needed for motivation and well-being. For women with SUD trying to reclaim sobriety and a healthy life, family can present both barriers and support. The aim of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of the intersection of family relationships with motivation of women in Drug Treatment Court (DTC) to attain their health goals. Data consist of transcribed intervention sessions between trained peer interventionists and 15 DTC participants from The Women’s Initiative Supporting Health DTC Intervention Study. This analysis uses a qualitative framework approach to analyze the data. The Self-determination Theory of human motivation and Family Systems Theory provide the conceptual framework to understand how participants’ expressions of motivation-related basic needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness and change-related behaviors interfaced with family support. Analysis revealed more mentions of family in motivation-supportive contexts than in motivation-thwarting contexts, but highlighted complex roles families can play in health of women in recovery from SUD. Providers may be able to incorporate this knowledge to address the needs of this challenging population.

Download Full-text